Re: clang and _Noreturn

[Paul Eggert]

On 04/24/2017 01:38 PM, Bruno Haible wrote:
> Hi Paul,
>
> > > the only position that works for both C and C++ is the first one:
> > >     _GL_NORETURN_FUNC extern void foo (void);
> > Maybe a shorter name for this usage: _GL_NORETURN, perhaps?
> If we want to offer a short macro name, such as _GL_NORETURN, it should
> be usable in both places, function declarations and function pointers.
> That is, make it an alias of _GL_NORETURN_FUNCPTR.

But that may not work best for function definitions and declarations, 
for compilers that don't support __attribute__ ((__noreturn__)). 
Function pointers are relatively rare compared to function definitions 
and declarations, so a short name is more-important for the latter.

> > Don't some compilers complain if the storage class ('extern', here) is
> > not first?
> GCC and clang, at least, prefer 'extern' after '[[noreturn]]'.
>
> Bruno
I vaguely recall problems with putting _Noreturn first, maybe for 
compilers that lacked native _Noreturn. Why, for example, was this patch 
made to clisp in 2011?

http://hg.code.sf.net/p/clisp/clisp/rev/c5ba2cfdd7fd?revcount=480